New Rank in Economics

[beagle07]

Originally Posted by israelecon

this is just not true. i know several economists who have published a few articles in AER while they were professors at pretty low-ranked universities.

I don't mean that it is impossible to publish in top journals if you are not at a top50 institution. I'm just saying it is my impression that the journals consider factors beyond the content of paper.

However, I don't have direct evidence. Does anyone have evidence beyond some counterexamples?

[Mr.Keen]

I was under the impression that what beagle07 suggested is true. Of course, you will find counterexamples, like israelecon mentions, but those seem to be outliers. It's really hard to tell because there's a lot of endogeneity between publishing at top journals and being affiliated with a top institution.

Another thought is that top field journals are an important outlet for good research that may not be high-impact enough to get into the top broader journals. I remember a paper on Heckscher-Ohlin business cycles published in the Review of Economic Dynamics that was really good and put forward a very interesting theory in an innovative way, but failed to address a key stylized fact. Then one professor said that had the model been able to address that issue it would've been published at JPE. I don't know anybody who would dismiss RED the way israelecon's professor dismissed SEJ.

[representative_agent]

This is not exactly a counterexample...

http://www.homepages.ucl.ac.uk/~uctprsp/QJE.pdf

[untitled]

I believe you are talking about "insider bias."

As for the issue of which journals to read, I think that people read most of what is written that is in their area and reputably published. Many don't always wait until things are published, as NEP: RePEc will email you working papers in your area.

[Karina 07]

Originally Posted by israelecon

in any case, i actually asked a professor of mine about SEJ (because of this discussion and he said: "i would rather throw the article in the garbage than publish it there". i think this does say something about the article.

Can I draw a parallel?
Econ PhD admissions.
Someone saying they'd rather not go anywhere at all than go to a top 50 or whatever school.
Fine, that's some people's preferences (and it says as much about the person's preferences as it does about the quality).
But it's not the kind of thing that should be loudly exclaimed in public.

[Bored]

Originally Posted by israelecon

the point was that basically such a publication is valueless as research. i.e. if it can't get published in a better place its not worth much research wise.
...
people going into academia have to realize that they are entering the big-leagues now where they will be evaluated on quality of output regardless of the effort input.

I think I remember seeing a paper by Heckman, Tobias and Vyltacil in the SEJ from a while back.

Someone better tell them that they are in the big leagues now.

(It was probably a guest piece, but still...)

[jeeves0923]

Originally Posted by Bored

I think I remember seeing a paper by Heckman, Tobias and Vyltacil in the SEJ from a while back.

Someone better tell them that they are in the big leagues now.

(It was probably a guest piece, but still...)

I bet it wasn't that publication that gave Heckman a Nobel Prize. I bet that publication didn't really advance his career all that much either. It seems as though israelecon's point [that these publications might not help your research career] still holds in spite of your "counterexample."

[bojangles42124]

It seems like this paper is being discredited by people on this forum. But what do you guys think about the ranking for the "Mathematical and Quantitative Methods" JEL sub-category?

1) Yale
2) UC San Diego
3) MIT
4) Northwestern
5) Harvard
6) Wisconsin
7) Princeton
8) UC Berkeley
9) NYU
10) UCLA

Isn't this pretty realistic?

[italos]

Originally Posted by bojangles42124

It seems like this paper is being discredited by people on this forum. But what do you guys think about the ranking for the "Mathematical and Quantitative Methods" JEL sub-category?

1) Yale
2) UC San Diego
3) MIT
4) Northwestern
5) Harvard
6) Wisconsin
7) Princeton
8) UC Berkeley
9) NYU
10) UCLA

Isn't this pretty realistic?

Hmm Columbia is missing......

Also UCSD second and Wisconsin sixth?????

[bojangles42124]

Originally Posted by italos

Hmm Columbia is missing......

Also UCSD second and Wisconsin sixth?????

...for mathematical and quantitative methods, I think that's pretty reasonable. I've heard that UCSD and Yale are THE places to go for econometric theory.